From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Karl Fogel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: participation & contribution [was: Latest changes with lisp/uni-*.el and leim/quail] Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 12:33:46 -0600 Message-ID: <87pppgmned.fsf@floss.red-bean.com> References: <83txew8m9v.fsf@gnu.org> <837gbr8uxa.fsf@gnu.org> <87wqjqts1b.fsf@gmail.com> <83zjom5ls5.fsf@gnu.org> <878uw5o2p1.fsf@floss.red-bean.com> <87y544bhdr.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: Karl Fogel NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1385922845 17831 80.91.229.3 (1 Dec 2013 18:34:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 18:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , dmoncayo@gmail.com, Jambunathan K , Drew Adams , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 01 19:34:09 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VnBqL-00017e-GI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 19:34:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60731 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VnBqL-0000bi-1U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:34:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56902) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VnBq6-00008q-J5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:33:59 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VnBq1-0001OF-96 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:33:54 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-yh0-x231.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4002:c01::231]:53675) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VnBq0-0001O6-Un; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:33:49 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-yh0-f49.google.com with SMTP id z20so8096891yhz.8 for ; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 10:33:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:reply-to:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=7xtPud7GLlfHuy9uIJOBhwWvosk3GO+V6s6ScqVTEFg=; b=t02l/JOZrTWocI9uO8v+pg2bFjRTZ5aB5y+spa9G42sp3MtmgF3qDUncxzDiTxCXlY rZEQWNYUMiUKbom5DAhM30RhY+IO/kfOWJPtHeAWv4k7U6rgigjMZCS5Sf8KE7U0iHSS +sO1B9ERdAzJ1wYrwBmQ3fdQ19FV82eQr1VhndLLm+hbA5DqB85D1YaMuAuZ3tzE8Q8q NHEbOppRFFy7bnzxoTJ+yykUa4Bv+JoXubRiPDuuWofi6D6tJQ12Xqs59uUJ9rCrG6sR /STGQWHvLodP+2fPbrVSGMo84NuUUksWR36M5IdELf5RIZLky7yNtN4Ixxq0yhcQhl38 vimQ== X-Received: by 10.236.144.103 with SMTP id m67mr81467yhj.146.1385922828453; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 10:33:48 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from floss.red-bean.com (64-145-114-106.client.dsl.net. [64.145.114.106]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b30sm5828630yhm.5.2013.12.01.10.33.47 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 01 Dec 2013 10:33:47 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87y544bhdr.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (Stephen J. Turnbull's message of "Mon, 02 Dec 2013 02:39:12 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4002:c01::231 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:165989 Archived-At: "Stephen J. Turnbull" writes: >Really? What he did was to get commit privileges, and then repeatedly >refuse to use them because the VCS *he* chose is too much trouble to >learn how to use. That's "normal"? Not saying it's common, but I've seen it before with drive-by contributions (even from people who technically have commit access). > > He (and others) objected to him being *criticized*. It's fine to > > choose not to commit his patch; it's not fine to flame him for > > having different priorities from some other developers. > >The objections are misguided. His behavior is rude and deserves >criticism. The circumstances explain, even if they don't justify, the >public flames. > >Although the words flamed his priorities, the *reason* he was flamed >is that he is abusing the hospitality of Eli (and Glenn), who spent a >fair amount of effort mentoring him, without which there would be no >committable patch. He repaid that effort by refusing to take on a >minor chore (committing his own patch), and justified that by >explaining how valuable his time is to him. I didn't know about the mentoring, and agree that in that circumstance there is often an implicit bargain of "If we help you get up to speed, you'll take the trouble to repay our efforts by contributing (overcoming whatever minor technical obstacles that may involve)." That changes things. Based on just the messages I saw, this history wasn't apparent -- sorry for commenting without knowing the full context. Best, -K